Netanyahu reshuffle means Israel being taken over by ‘extremists’

[Jingthing]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/22/opinion/sunday/israels-army-goes-to-war-with-its-politicians.html

So whose views should prevail? Those who operate at the coal-face or an intransigent, belligerent politician and his even more belligerent "allies"?

Thanks for posting that. Not really news to those of us who have followed this for awhile though. As some have predicted Liberman is making some moderating noises now as he announced he is backing away from his previous position favoring the death penalty for terrorists. But I doubt anyone is really fooled by that to think he's really changed.

[Jingthing]

More about how the Liberman move --

http://forward.com/opinion/341198/how-netanyahu-showed-the-army-whos-boss-by-handing-the-keys-to-the-far-righ/?attribution=home-hero-item-text-1

There are many ways to describe the Israeli cabinet shakeup that brings arch-nationalist Avigdor Lieberman into the Netanyahu government as defense minister. It’s a broadening and firming of a shaky coalition. It’s a lurch to the right. It’s a settling of scores. Most consequentially, though, it might be called a military coup in reverse.

That is, it’s a sudden strike by Israel’s civilian government to reassert control over a military that’s been acting lately like an alternate source of authority. On issues as large as regional strategy toward Iran or relations with the Palestinian Authority and as small as rules for opening fire, the military command has repeatedly questioned, challenged or openly clashed with its civilian bosses. That’s untenable in a democratic society. A counter-move was inevitable.

By removing defense minister Moshe Yaalon, a former career soldier and military chief of staff who’s part and parcel of Israel Defense Forces culture, and replacing him with Lieberman, a frequent critic of the military brass, Netanyahu is showing the generals who’s boss. That may not be what Netanyahu intended in this latest round of coalition musical chairs, but that’s what happened.

[DaddyWarbucks]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/22/opinion/sunday/israels-army-goes-to-war-with-its-politicians.html

So whose views should prevail? Those who operate at the coal-face or an intransigent, belligerent politician and his even more belligerent "allies"?

Thanks for posting that. Not really news to those of us who have followed this for awhile though. As some have predicted Liberman is making some moderating noises now as he announced he is backing away from his previous position favoring the death penalty for terrorists. But I doubt anyone is really fooled by that to think he's really changed.

What Lieberman and his colleagues say is less important than what they do.

The test will come soon in the form of two UN peace initiatives led by France and the Palestinian Authority respectively.

The Israel lobby in Washington can be expected to go once more unto the breach.

Early signs of that appeared on Sunday when Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Ed Royce told the Jerusalem Post's annual conference in New York: "My concern is that the administration might... allow this French initiative to go forward.

[Johpa]

I read recently that Hezbollah have indicated that they intend to make the ground run red with the blood of Israeli children. How can you defend such an attitude? How can you criticise putting these vermin down?

Further support of my position that both sides are in the wrong and a pox upon both their houses. But calling people vermin and then calling for "putting them down" is about as despicable as one can get. You can't get much lower on the continuum of humanity than that. You need to be put away somewhere out of reach of society. I believe there are openings at Guantanamo.

You have no criticism of this? "they intend to make the ground run red with the blood of Israeli children". You actually dare to criticise my post?

I noted that both sides are in the wrong. But it was your despicable words that were posted here on ThaiVisa in the first person and it doesn't take a dare on my part to criticize such hatred.

[Dumbastheycome]

How long has Israel been a country?

How long has Palestine been a country?

Questions due to a very old map in a book I'm reading at the moment. Unfortunately the map is not dated but...it clearly shows Israel and it's borders. There is no Palestine marked.

Perfect desciple!

[Morch]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/22/opinion/sunday/israels-army-goes-to-war-with-its-politicians.html

So whose views should prevail? Those who operate at the coal-face or an intransigent, belligerent politician and his even more belligerent "allies"?

As in many countries, the actual authority of an Israeli Minister of Defense does not extend to the levels implied by the article. Most of the examples included in the last paragraph would necessitate a government (or security cabinet) decision, Prime Ministerial approval or specific ministerial input. There were, in Israel's past, Ministers of Defense which defied such limitation, but they all had the advantage of being "home grown" (former IDF generals or other security related positions), while most "outsider" ministers got a bit of a run around. Like any large organization, the IDF can be quite adept at dragging its collective feet when deemed necessary.

The sort of power a Minister of Defense such as Lieberman could bring to bear is more to do with them "little things" (very relatively speaking) - appointments within the IDF and the Ministery of Defense, allocation of budgets, prioritizing projects and tasks. He could also effect the lives of the Palestinians simply by not pushing forward initiatives (such as approving more work permits), utilizing Ministry of Defense departments related to issues concerning the illegal Israeli settlements, and a multitude of decisions which effect daily life in the West Bank.

How much of an issue his expected term would pose for IDF generals? Depends. Most of the current higher ups were approved by Yaalon, and not very likely to change their views overnight. The Minister of Defense cannot simply replace one general with another or promote a junior one on a whim. He may reject certain appointments, but the cadre of candidates to choose from is limited. It becomes more relevant when appointing the Chief of Staff and his Deputy. The current Chief of Staff's term is set at least until 2018, while the next elections are set for 2019. I wouldn't bet on the government lasting a full term, nor on any given minister having a secure seat. Guess generals can count and are familiar with Israeli politics as well.

I would imagine that the potential damage, as far as the IDF goes, is more to do with trickle down effects rather than overt policy changes. A MoD undermining the IDF's high command authority, may lead to similar instances at lower levels of command. Such an erosion of authority, standards and policy is way harder to counter. It stands to reason that the IDF generals will try to minimize public instances of such disagreements, but doubt they would bend over if things go too far. Again, more a question of how much Lieberman will be seen as a permanent fixture.

As mentioned in the article, Netanyahu is more focused on personal political goals compared to national interests (or perhaps he sees them as converging). But the idea of Netanyahu as being some short of master planner is way off mark. Netanyahu does not do things long term. Negotiations with opposition parties aimed at broadening the coalition where going on behind the scenes for quite a while. The choice to go with Lieberman (rather than Herzog) was more to do with political constraints and possibilities. That it also "helped" ousting Yaalon and curbing the perceived IDF's competing influence, is more of a "bonus".

[Morch]

What Lieberman and his colleagues say is less important than what they do.The test will come soon in the form of two UN peace initiatives led by France and the Palestinian Authority respectively.

The Israel lobby in Washington can be expected to go once more unto the breach.

Early signs of that appeared on Sunday when Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Ed Royce told the Jerusalem Post's annual conference in New York: "My concern is that the administration might... allow this French initiative to go forward.

What does "test" got to do with it? Was there any sign that Netanyahu (or Lieberman) was willing to embrace the French initiative? For that matter, not clear how the above is tied to the OP - Netanyahu pretty much rejected the proposal, and that was before Lieberman's party joining the coalition became an issue.

[Morch]

Signing of Coalition Deal Between Lieberman, Netanyahu Delayed

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.720950

Coalition talks snag over immigrant pensions

http://www.timesofisrael.com/coalition-talks-snag-over-immigrant-pensions/

Netanyahu unfazed as Liberman says coalition talks deadlocked

http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-unfazed-as-liberman-says-coalition-talks-are-deadlocked/

[TooPoopedToPop]

The Israeli leadership gets more bizarre all the time. The appointment of Avigdor Lieberman - an ex-nightclub chucker-out from Moldova - as DM would be funny if it didn't have such potentially dire consequences for the Palestinians and the moderate Israelis.

Wake up you Palestinian hashishins and Zionist meshugas​, you've had your blood-orgy and it has lasted far too long. Start working for a peaceful settlement.

The way things are now, the whole world is against you.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed.